Raidri wrote:Taking bets on how many of these are real and how many are fake. Seems about half and half to me.

LOL

# 1, 2, 3, 4, & 8 are all real. The remainder are analogies used by geologists. If Randall had delved further into the snack food realm, the drawings would have included snickers, oreos, and so much more.

Raidri wrote:Taking bets on how many of these are real and how many are fake. Seems about half and half to me.

LOL

# 1, 2, 3, 4, & 8 are all real. The remainder are analogies used by geologists. If Randall had delved further into the snack food realm, the drawings would have included snickers, oreos, and so much more.

Damn it Jim, I'm a physicist ... not a geologist. But I really though #7 was legit. The angles on that "squeezed bar of soap" fault seem a bit too steep for the upward force to exceed sliding friction, but with a shallower angle it would seem possible. Or is #7 a "this never happens"?

Raidri wrote:Taking bets on how many of these are real and how many are fake. Seems about half and half to me.

1, 2, 3, and 4 are real geologic faults5 can represent geologic deformation, but the term given is fake6 is a fake diagram with a real geologic fault term7, 8, and 9 are fake [geologically speaking] (Kudos to #7 for geologic inspiration, because it's clearly a twist on a block diagram of a horst - if only either side of the "soap bar" were normal faults https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horst_(geology) )

What's up with the manufacturers of cereals, crackers, granola bars, and the like? It happens way too often that the seams are way too strong, that the bag breaks well before the seam comes unseamed.

Macbeth unseamed Macdonwald from nave to chops. What happens to these bags is not quite as messy, but it doesn't make me look kindly on their designers.

Most bags are stretched top-down, so any tear will want to go into that direction. Knowing that, you can tear it open sideways in order to prevent containment faults.

Also if you open bags by tearing apart the seam, don't pull with your arms, but grab both sides with thumb and index finger and roll your fists against each other, using your straight arms as levers. Since you don't use much strength that way, there is less chance of plinian chips eruption.

I thought it was just a reversed Graben. For a Horst, the fault lines would need to skew in the opposite direction. (The article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graben incidentally still uses the Horst diagram as the main image.)

Hiferator wrote:Thanks for the list. So what is a splinted fault (6) then? I couldn't find that anywhere.The thing about 5 and 8 is, that they don't show a fault at all (and 7 contains 2 faults).

I had to look up splinter fault, but it is used occasionally in research papers to describe faults that branch from large fault, or minor unnamed faults within a larger fault zone. I am curious why Randall picked up that esoteric term over other fault types that could one could easily poke fun at.

I thought it was just a reversed Graben. For a Horst, the fault lines would need to skew in the opposite direction. (The article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graben incidentally still uses the Horst diagram as the main image.)

A graben is by definition a depressed [or dropped] block of rock, you can't really reverse it. The closest thing to a "reverse graben" is the horst, but both are created in rifting zones (extensional forces) and are typically found together. If the forces are reversed (compressional) it would create thrust faults, not reverse grabens.

Hiferator wrote:...So what is a splinted fault (6) then? I couldn't find that anywhere.

Oh shit, I looked at this again realized I imagined splinter fault and just kept reading that instead of splinted fault. Total tunnel-vision on my part. So, yeah you're right.... splinted fault (#6) is all fake. Sorry for that.

What's up with the manufacturers of cereals, crackers, granola bars, and the like? It happens way too often that the seams are way too strong, that the bag breaks well before the seam comes unseamed.

Macbeth unseamed Macdonwald from nave to chops. What happens to these bags is not quite as messy, but it doesn't make me look kindly on their designers.

For each inch of seam, 1 pound of C-4.

Or scissors. You know, whatever's available.

In our office we get sachets of coffee for the percolator. They used to come with a little nick cut into one edge so they could be easily torn open. Then suddenly they stopped having this. The edges are "crinkle cut" so there are lots of sharp interior angles, and it's still sometimes possible to start the tear at one of these. But it's chance whether it works or not. Now there's a pair of scissors, and on average it's better to get the scissors out of the cupboard than to keep trying to tear the sachet by hand. The point is: why oh why did they make the change? My two theories are that they were tearing open by accident or that cutting the nick was costing a few millipence per unit and they wanted to increase the profit margin. But I hate it when things that worked perfectly well get uninvented. (See also: computer software).

What's up with the manufacturers of cereals, crackers, granola bars, and the like? It happens way too often that the seams are way too strong, that the bag breaks well before the seam comes unseamed.

Macbeth unseamed Macdonwald from nave to chops. What happens to these bags is not quite as messy, but it doesn't make me look kindly on their designers.

For each inch of seam, 1 pound of C-4.

Or scissors. You know, whatever's available.

In our office we get sachets of coffee for the percolator. They used to come with a little nick cut into one edge so they could be easily torn open. Then suddenly they stopped having this. The edges are "crinkle cut" so there are lots of sharp interior angles, and it's still sometimes possible to start the tear at one of these. But it's chance whether it works or not. Now there's a pair of scissors, and on average it's better to get the scissors out of the cupboard than to keep trying to tear the sachet by hand. The point is: why oh why did they make the change? My two theories are that they were tearing open by accident or that cutting the nick was costing a few millipence per unit and they wanted to increase the profit margin. But I hate it when things that worked perfectly well get uninvented. (See also: computer software).

This is why I keep a box cutter in my shirt pocket. This, and CD cases, and grocery coupons, and the twine they use to bundle newspapers, and the reinforced tape Amazon uses to seal cartons, and....

Ranbot wrote:Oh shit, I looked at this again realized I imagined splinter fault and just kept reading that instead of splinted fault. Total tunnel-vision on my part. So, yeah you're right.... splinted fault (#6) is all fake. Sorry for that.

Hah, I didn't notice the difference in your first post either. Funny how these very closely related terms have almost opposite meanings, because a splint(er) which is broken of something can then be used to splint and thus (often) rejoin something else.

Ranbot wrote:A graben is by definition a depressed [or dropped] block of rock, you can't really reverse it. The closest thing to a "reverse graben" is the horst, but both are created in rifting zones (extensional forces) and are typically found together. If the forces are reversed (compressional) it would create thrust faults, not reverse grabens.

I understand that, it was just not my first association, because of the different shapes (or rather orientation of shapes) in the usual diagram for a horst. When I wrote "reverse graben", I didn't mean to imply such a thing exists, just in my mind both diagrams show a movement already in progress that may start with an even surface. So if you reverse all the arrows from Randall's diagram, the indicated movement leads to a graben and if you keep them as they are, it leads to Randall's diagram (if movement according to those arrows were possible), i.e. a graben would sink while the sides drift apart, whereas in Randall's diagram the middle part has already (hypothetically) risen, while the sides are converging.